A judge with some common sense.

[Revmitchell]

A federal judge has ordered that the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence pay the legal fees of an online ammunition dealer it sued for the Aurora movie theater shooting.

The order, which was issued last week, comes after Judge Richard P. Matsch dismissed the gun control group's suit that sought to hold Lucky Gunner legally responsible for the 2012 shooting. The Brady Center had argued in their suit that the way Lucky Gunner sells ammunition is "unreasonably dangerous and create a public nuisance."

"A crazed, homicidal killer should not be able to amass a military arsenal, without showing his face or answering a single question, with the simple click of a mouse," Brady Center's Legal Action Project Director Jonathan Lowy said at the time. "If businesses choose to sell military-grade equipment online, they must screen purchasers to prevent arming people like James Holmes."

Judge Matsch disagreed with the Brady Center's argument. He said the suit was filed for propaganda purposes. "It is apparent that this case was filed to pursue the political purposes of the Brady Center and, given the failure to present any cognizable legal claim, bringing these defendants into the Colorado court where the prosecution of James Holmes was proceeding appears to be more of an opportunity to propagandize the public and stigmatize the defendants than to obtain a court order," he said in his order.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...pay-ammo-dealers-legal-fees-after-dismissing/

 

[Crabtownboy]

This may well go on to the Supreme Court. The final answer is not in yet.

 

[Don]

CTB - so you're in favor of limiting my free commerce choices to obtain ammunition at reasonable prices? Ammunition that I use to chase off coyotes, raccoons, possums, skunks, and other varmints that are trying to kill/eat my chickens, ducks, and rabbits?

 

[Crabtownboy]

CTB - so you're in favor of limiting my free commerce choices to obtain ammunition at reasonable prices? Ammunition that I use to chase off coyotes, raccoons, possums, skunks, and other varmints that are trying to kill/eat my chickens, ducks, and rabbits?

Didn't say that Don. I simply said the issue has not received a final ruling. My guess is it will stand, but it may be overturned. Time will tell. Anyway, that is not the topic of the OP.

 

[carpro]

This may well go on to the Supreme Court. The final answer is not in yet.

No it won't.

It's a no brainer.

 

[Don]

Didn't say that Don. I simply said the issue has not received a final ruling. My guess is it will stand, but it may be overturned. Time will tell. Anyway, that is not the topic of the OP.

Then what is the topic of the OP, if not the Brady Center's attempt to prevent the purchase of ammunition over the internet?

 

[Revmitchell]

Didn't say that Don. I simply said the issue has not received a final ruling. My guess is it will stand, but it may be overturned. Time will tell. Anyway, that is not the topic of the OP.

It is the topic of the op. Seriously do you not have anything else.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Then what is the topic of the OP, if not the Brady Center's attempt to prevent the purchase of ammunition over the internet?

The real topic of the case was holding Lucky Gunner legally responsible for the 2012 shooting as stated in the 2nd line of the article quoted in the OP.

 

[Don]

The real topic of the case was holding Lucky Gunner legally responsible for the 2012 shooting as stated in the 2nd line of the article quoted in the OP.

If that's truly the topic - then I can't see the SC agreeing to hear the case.

 

[Rolfe]

Glad that it went LuckyGunner's way. They are good people.

 

[Don]

The real topic of the case was holding Lucky Gunner legally responsible for the 2012 shooting as stated in the 2nd line of the article quoted in the OP.

Ya know, I just can't let this one go. If you truly think that was the real topic of the case -- then you're fooling yourself. The real topic of the case was an effort to make it financially prohibitive for people to sell "military grade equipment" over the internet. The judge saw that, and that's why he ruled against it.

If the judge had ruled on the side of the Brady Center, then online vendors would incur responsibility for the use of the items they sold. We don't have that limitation on brick-and-mortar establishments.

So my question still stands, CTB: Are you in favor of limiting my free commerce choices?

 

[carpro]

So my question still stands, CTB: Are you in favor of limiting my free commerce choices?

He's in favor of whatever any one of several radical leftist websites tell him he's in favor of.

He'll get back to you after they tell him what to say.